The military's armed surveillance drones are the most elite modernized weaponry in the twenty-first century. They have introduced a new way to see without being seen. In this paper, I investigate the US military's use of drones in warfare, specifically in terms of distance and what that entails for the operator physically, mentally, and emotionally. My analysis will address the question: how are remotely piloted aircrafts connecting distance and humanity in asymmetric warfare? I argue that drones are unlike any other weapon produced thus far because they introduce a completely new way to fight wars at a distance; therefore, a new understanding of humanity and warfare needs to be established. Warfare by remote control in a post-panoptic society has ended the era of mutual engagement and created one of extensive asymmetry. This thesis also examines the militaries historical motives for pursuing weapons that make the enemy into an objective target below. The data that I use to explore these implications is second-hand anecdotes and interviews of former RPA operators, and various media accounts. Based on this data, I find that drones have made it more difficult to kill a target due to the added surveillance technology that allows the operator to see the effects of his or her weapon in real time. This visualization then has the effect of creating intimacy/reducing emotional distance between the operator and the target. / Master of Arts

This thesis focuses on how the recently implemented automated speed enforcement (ASE) program in the City of Toronto functions as a tool of social control. Using a governmentality lens, it investigates the linkages between techniques for regulating conduct and the rationalities that justify and push citizens into modifying and constructing themselves. The central research question guiding this project is: How does automated speed enforcement (ASE) function as a mechanism of social control? The research conducted to investigate this question was divided into two stages. Phase 1 involved examining information from publicly available open datasets from the City of Toronto, the Toronto Police Service, and Ontario's Open Data Catalogue pertaining to ASE. The findings from this phase pointed to differing traffic reporting standards between stakeholders, discrepancies between the publicly stated priorities that are meant to inform the selection of locations at which ASE is installed and the location of 24 current ASE sites in the city, and gaps in ASE related information to which members of the public currently have access. Phase 2 involved conducting key informant interviewees with representatives from the City of Toronto, City Councillors, and representatives of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. These interviews revealed that there exist informal and formalized data sharing practices among road safety stakeholders, and that despite the existence of publicly available site selection criteria ambiguities persist regarding how locations for ASE installations actually are selected. Equally noteworthy, the interviews exposed contrasting perceptions about the extent to which monetary considerations inform the deployment and use of ASE. By examining the assemblages of tools, processes, and practices comprising the City of Toronto's ASE infrastructure, this thesis sheds light on how the latter work together to regulate, shape, and function as a post-panopticon tool of social control in the City of Toronto.This thesis focuses on how the recently implemented automated speed enforcement (ASE) program in the City of Toronto functions as a tool of social control. Using a governmentality lens, it investigates the linkages between techniques for regulating conduct and the rationalities that justify and push citizens into modifying and constructing themselves. The central research question guiding this project is: How does automated speed enforcement (ASE) function as a mechanism of social control? The research conducted to investigate this question was divided into two stages. Phase 1 involved examining information from publicly available open datasets from the City of Toronto, the Toronto Police Service, and Ontario's Open Data Catalogue pertaining to ASE. The findings from this phase pointed to differing traffic reporting standards between stakeholders, discrepancies between the publicly stated priorities that are meant to inform the selection of locations at which ASE is installed and the location of 24 current ASE sites in the city, and gaps in ASE related information to which members of the public currently have access. Phase 2 involved conducting key informant interviewees with representatives from the City of Toronto, City Councillors, and representatives of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. These interviews revealed that there exist informal and formalized data sharing practices among road safety stakeholders, and that despite the existence of publicly available site selection criteria ambiguities persist regarding how locations for ASE installations actually are selected. Equally noteworthy, the interviews exposed contrasting perceptions about the extent to which monetary considerations inform the deployment and use of ASE. By examining the assemblages of tools, processes, and practices comprising the City of Toronto's ASE infrastructure, this thesis sheds light on how the latter work together to regulate, shape, and function as a post-panopticon tool of social control in the City of Toronto.